tv Key Capitol Hill Hearings CSPAN March 7, 2016 8:32am-10:33am EST
>> guest: to really create an historic change for our country and on the planet. to me, to have jack being my buddy, we we played basketball every day for one hour. and while technically we weren't supposed to be talking about policy down there, when the endorphins were flowing, we would just sit there and keep trying to work out these differences so that we could get it done. and so we're just the best of friends, then and now. >> host: senator edward markey, democrat of massachusetts, and former representative jack feels, republican -- fields, republican from texas. >> guest: thank you very much. >> guest: thank you. >> c-span, created by america's cable companies 35 years ago and brought to you as a public service by your local cable or satellite provider.
>> the left institute hosts a summit on sentencing laws. participants include federal judges, advocates and states' attorneys general. it's live this morning here at 8:45 here on c-span2. the american conservative union annual conservative political action conference wrapped up saturday. its chair, matt schlapp, spoke at the event friday and talked about the conservative message and the need for the republican party to stay united in order to win in november. this is about 15 minutes. ♪ ♪ [applause]
♪ ♪ >> well, hello, conservatives. [cheers and applause] it has been a long seven years. obama's radical policies are hurting us. we feel defeated. our economy is stagnant. our military is underfunded, and our veterans feel forgotten. our faith is not respected or protected. and what's the state of the american family? we all know that without strong families we will perish. [applause] americans want to feel strong again, safe again, confident again and free again.
>> and not have to wait in lines? >> that's fair, that's fair. [laughter] it's the price of freedom, my friend. [applause] all of us are worried that god's blessings are fading. that our constitution is under attack. we fear radical islamic terror will invade us, and bloated government -- addicted to controlling our lives -- will destroy us. and congress is filled with many strong conservatives, but let's face it, congress refuses to use all its powers to stop obama. and he's changed the game on all of us. [applause] you know, people talk about angry and frustrated voters. who can blame us? you know, we have a president who thinks that nuns need contraception coverage. [laughter] he thinks iran should get nukes.
he thinks that when we have terror on our soil, that it's workplace violation. [laughter] and he refers to the butchers at planned parenthood as just doing the lord's work. [laughter] there's so much condition fusion these days -- confusion these days that even high school boys and girls, they don't even know what locker room to use anymore. [laughter] and don't get me started on the supreme court. let me be clear, mr. president, you will not fill the scalia seat with an err -- eric holder! [cheers and applause] president obama, he shattered
the model of what it means to unite americans in a common purpose. you know, he deserves a political ph.d. in political math because it was him, it's all about division. let me ask you a question. how many of you with listen to rush limbaugh? [cheers and applause] do you like rush? 'cuz it's no surprise that mercy and i listen to rush. and the other day we were listening, and a caller, he just nailed it. you know what he said about how we feel? we are tired of feeling unimportant. we feel like we carry the whole country on our backs. do any of you feel the same way? [applause] you know who understood this? ronald reagan understood this. he understood the frustration of the american people when he spoke with that reassuring and inspirational voice.
it was reagan who said for whatever history does finally say about our cause, this cause, it must say the conservative movement in america held fast through the hard and difficult years. the hard and difficult years. my friends, these have been the hard and difficult years that reagan predicted. but, you know, now it's time to talk about the future. and i can see light coming from the top of the hill. the american conservative union and our conservative movement is growing stronger. we're adding new voices. and you know what we're prepared for? we are prepared for the obama exit. [cheers and applause] exit. i'll tell you one thing that we're not prepared for, i'm not prepared for, i'm not prepared
for bill clinton with too much time on his hands -- [laughter] hanging around the white house near those white house interns. [laughter] i'm not prepared for that. [applause] and i'm not prepared to see queen hillary on the throne where she likes to keep her servers. [laughter] think about it. [applause] look at all the young people around us. look at 'em. they tell us that young people are not conservatives. [applause] look around you. these are the grandchildren of the reagan revolution. [cheers and applause] tell me something, grandchildren of the reagan revolution, do you feel the bern? >> no! >> i bet you want jobs. you want to experience the earn.
[laughter] [applause] but it's not just about the college kids, tests also about the young -- it's also about the young and the young at heart x. as you saw, mercy and i are raising five beautiful girls. 9 they're not always perfect, i'll tell you that right ahead of time. i don't know what their politics will be. early indicators are good. [laughter] what mercy and i want more than anything, this is the most important thing, is for them to understand that america is exceptional. [applause] why are we exceptional? because here the individual is recognized to have god-given rights enshrined in law and that the individual is protected by that law to take on the masters of government when they encroach, when they squat, when
they bullly or when they -- bully, or when they intimidate us. and each generation is obligated to entrust this understanding of our exceptionalism to the next. and this reminds me of a special kansan who's battling cancer. and while she fights for her health, she's worried about her country. her kids came to her recently and offered to send her on a vacation, a couple of quiet days by the water. they also offered her a chance for a four-day pass the cpac. this grandmother and great grandmother of 46, she chose cpac. [cheers and applause] and what's more, today's her birthday. [applause] mary freewell, you are a conservative grassroots hero, and you are exceptional. thank you for being here.
[cheers and applause] we would have cheered just for the 46. [laughter] i mean, we would have stopped there. one of the main reasons i love coming to cpacing is because this is the place -- cpac, is because this is the place where we all come together, and we speak freely. each of you is here because you care enough to come here. you invest your time and your resources. and we understand that. and you come here to take a crash course on the state of your country. you know what i understand? you love your country. [cheers and applause]
i'd like to tell you about someone else who loved his country. he lived under castro's cuba, a place that where if you disagree with the regime -- and, boy, it's a regime -- they will take from you, they will imprison you, or even worse, they will kill you. my father-in-law, jose, here told was one of the many cubans who lost everything. but you know what he did? he fought back. he organized a small group of freedom fighters who planned an attack on fidel castro. in the end, they were betrayed by one of their own and all were either jailed or murdered. jose got out alive. but his cell mate, he was executed. could i tell you how incredible it is to have a father-in-law who fought for freedom and tried to rid the world of one of the most heinous tyrants and how sad
it is, how tragic it is to watch our president appease these very same dictators? [applause] i'm inspired knowing america gave him a second chance at freedom. [applause] he's taught his children and his grandchildren and me the importance of protecting and defending this great nation now and forever. jose villana, we salute you. [cheers and applause]
mary, jose, i call him pepe -- [laughter] all of us are worried that our movement, a all of us -- that all of us, that we're hopelessly fractured. that our movement will never be the same. that our divisions will result in even more losses, that our conservative movement is damaged beyond repair. we are at a critical moment for conservatives. so many are rooting against us. they're hoping we fail. but, you know, we've been here before. i think the path before us is pretty simple. we're going to have to decide; do we fracture or do we stand together as conservatives and prevail? i know we can. despite what the pundits are saying about us, don't fear this moment. embrace it.
and like all challenges -- and this is quite a challenge -- we'll be stronger when we get through it. but we'll only prevail if we fight together now. [applause] conservatives, let us work together to make this our time. our time is now. thank you very much. [cheers and applause] thank you. [applause] ♪ ♪ >> and c-span2 will be live this
morning at georgetown university for a discussion about prison sentencing laws. the discussion hosted by a nonprofit jewish organization that works with specific populations that are isolated from the regular community. u.s. military personnel, prisoners and ohs. -- others. we'll be hearing from federal judges this morning as well as state attorneys general and also advocates during the summit which is expected to run through the early afternoon. things running a bit behind schedule. this was scheduled to start at 8:45 eastern time. we'll bring you to georgetown university as soon as things get under way. in the meantime, more from the conservative political action conference. ♪ ♪
>> well, anyone following mark levin has a tough act to follow, but we're going to try, respect we? >> we are. >> i came across an article not too long ago where an american commentator was looking at different things trying to assess the state of this country as it faced a moment of particular opportunity. he looked at economic situations in our cities, compared them with things in towns and communities, rural communities. he looked at birthrates, he looked at family formation, he looked at the cost of starting a business, and he came to the conclusion that all of those things were going to be important in assessing america's potential which he believed would be powerful even though it was at a time of great uncertainty. that commentator could have been someone like arthur murray who just put out a recent book called "coming apart." but it wasn't. the person that looked at that
mix of things was benjamin franklin in 1755. he concluded that based on the progress our country was making on those mix of factors, that our best days were yet ahead. well, we're here to talk about an opportunity to revisit much the very same mix. acu, the american conservative union foundation, working with terrific economists and eventually state-based leaders throughout this country has put together something called the family prosperity initiative. we're here to spend some time talking today about how that can help you out in each of your communities work with neighbors to understand the impact of policies on the things that matter most to all of us. we can all look at national measurements and get a sense of what they mean, but prosperity and success is a personal experience. it happens up close. so i'm delighted and honored today to be joined by four distinguished panelists on stage. we're going to spend a few
moments talking about some of these factors and what you can do to use them in your advocacy and work in your communities. we'll hear statements from each of our panelists just briefly as we open. we'll begin with mr. larry kudlow who's known to so many of you, a longtime economist, commentator around the country, terrific. [applause] he'll be followed by, he'll be followed by ms. jillane apling. then dr. wendy who is one of the economists who helped put this tremendous index together. and finally, former congressman bob bow pray, two-time congressman from the state of colorado. mr. kudlow. >> thank you very much, appreciate it. hi, everybody, thank you for having me. i want to talk about a subject that is, i guess, not my usual discussion on the air, but a
very important topic: marriage. marriage. economists should pay more attention to and think more about marriage. so the battle will rage. the biggest issue of our time at home is the lack of economic growth. the issue is why? there are a lot of reasons. i'm not going to walk through taxes and regulations, because that's what i normally do. much of the reduction of growth is coming from an increase in poverty which is caused by family break-up. that's where it's coming from. [applause] study after study has shown
married families make more income, make more wealth and are happier. that's right, happier. i've been married 28 years to a saint -- [laughter] i'm very grateful. and i have a smile on my face. so i want to the talk about this for a moment. family break-up versus marriage. to my way of thinking, there's a path, it's a cultural path that becomes a societal cultural path. hear me out on this. you have a kid, young kid, 8, 10, 12 years old, okay? and that kid comes from a broken family. and his or her chances of
success are low. that's what the numbers show. they're low. so i suggest the following. number one, make sure that kid finishes school. school. high school minimum, maybe community college, learn a skill, maybe go on to a four-year college, but schooling is so important. we're not doing that anymore. we're not doing that anymore. number two, get a job. get a job. no matter how good or not good, you're not going to start as a ceo, just get a job. [laughter] [applause] you know why? showing up every day is a responsible way of living, and
the sooner you get that, the better off you're going to be. it's almost a lost cultural issue. just work. now, number three, you meet a girl, you meet a boy. great. as my wife, my saintly wife says all the time, before you make any decisions, do your research. [laughter] do your research. i don't know, i must have proposed to my wife, i don't know, three, four times? i can't even remember. [laughter] finally, she hit the bid. finally. she was checking me out. i don't blame her. [laughter] but the real lesson here, the real lesson here is not to just jump into bed together, but spend some time talking,
learning, relationship building. and then -- and here's my key point -- or and then you have your schooling, you still have to have your job, you go on ahead and get married after some time, and then you have the kid. [applause] my point -- thank you, appreciate it. i really do. my point is we are doing it backwards. backwards. we're having the kid first. don't even bother with the marriage, don't even bother with a job, don't even bother with the education. where does this come from? i don't know. we've lost track of a very traditional american value, and that is the culture of marriage and child rearing. we must not lose that.
[applause] a few more points. so much of this is, as i said, a cultural issue, a social issue, it is passed on from generation to generation. but it's very important. some of it, however, does have to do with economics and the federal government, the role of the federal government. the role of the federal government for the last five decades or so has been in inemmiccal in opposition to the kind of traditional culture of family and marriage that i'm talking about. the government is providing assistance for people to have out-of-wedlock children, to have fatherless children, not to work, not to full pill your responsibility -- fulfill your responsibility in parenting. the government is handing out money, tax credits or direct federal assistance.
and it's wrong. i'm not here to be a killjoy. all right? i'm not saying i don't believe in the safety net. my brother, mark levin, was talking of we both worked in the reagan administration. ronald reagan believed in the safety net up to a point. up to a point. but welfare is not a substitute for marriage, for child rearing, for education, for living responsibly, for making responsible choices. welfare is not a substitute for any of that, none of it. [applause] so i'll go back and end where i started. we have a big problem in this country. we haven't grown the economy in virtually 15 years. the numbers are stark; 1.7% annual rate for the past 15 years under democratic and
republican presidents and congresses. they haven't delivered. for the whole prior 50 years, for the whole prior 50 years, the american economy postwar grew at 3.5% per year. fifteen years most recently, 1.7%, what is that all about? it's about lousy policies, and i'm not going to go through all of that except to say this: the problem of growth and the problem of poverty are the real issues. not inequality, not socialism, government spending, not high taxing the rich, not penalizing american success. the problem is american values, traditional american values and the decline of the culture of family and marriage, and only we, only we, only we can change
this or bolster it or teach it. do you follow me? no bureaucrat is going to teach us that. no house member, no senate member -- god bless all of them. you have to do it right where you are at home many your lives. there are right decisions and wrong decisions. the rise of poverty class is so tightly linked, so tightly linked to the incidence of divorce and out-of-wedlock marriages and kids. [applause] it is so tightly related. [applause] so you'll hear a lot of good statistics and numbers and indicators about this. i just want to say that not everything is an economic problem. that's me, kudlow saying not everything is an economic problem. there are some problems that are social and cultural. and i beg everybody -- i'd like to see these candidates talk about it on the stump. we must return to the value and the culture of marriage and
parenting and teaching kids the right decisions, not the wrong ones. and if we do that, we'll increase the growth rate, we'll make people happier, and america will be a better country. thank you. [applause] >> thank you, mr. kudlow. >> well, first of all, let me say that mr. kudlow has my vote for president. [laughter] thank you for those great remarks. and i completely concur with them. i would say, too, i'm not an economist, but i am a champion for families, and i'm an end user of the kind of products that we're talking about today, the family prosper by be index developed by my friends, wendy and scott. and as i listened to mr. kudlow, i'm reminded of several things. first and foremost, i think, is that we need to get rid of the misconception that conservatives are not -- are without compassion. we are truly concerned about the well being of the entire person. and we understand that that well
1.9 for woman birthrate is significantly below the 2.1 2.1 children per woman need not just to keep your population study. this is an important topic. the family prosperity index afford us real data that links these of variables that we been talking about, the issues that he was addressing about marriage and about the economy of the family and the policies that are put in place a government that are typical for people to have a good job come to find a good job, keep a job come increase their salary after household income. those are very real situations. i will close with this. i love the fact ronald reagan is
being mentioned are so frequently at cpac this year. a lot of people don't realize this but on september 2 in 1987 after three years of consulting with senior advisers president reagan issued, please don't hold this against him or make him an executive order. it was not the kind of executive order we've seen over the last eight years. this is truly an executive order that was towards his administration. it had no lawmaking capacity. it was an approach from the president to say to his agency chief, his death from everybody in this administration look, before you put a project of also anything in place i want you to subjected to litmus test. the executive order was entitled to family. it's an incredible document. it's 12606. i urge you to read. it about eight points in which he laid out questions that the agencies were supposed to ask themselves about how the policy of the program of the project
would impact family unit would increase their earnings or decrease them a? them? what's been there for the program? does it make that family stronger? those are questions that he wanted his entire administration to address. i think we need to get back to the. i think every single elected official needs to get back to that because it forced him to understand that as the family, so the state. the family prosperity index enabled somebody like me to use to effect real change in my state as i worked with legislators to say to them looking we need to pass policies that increase the likelihood of people of being able to get good jobs, keep the good jobs, make choices. one of the thing that i think is important families have sufficient income, they can make school choices. they are not bound into a one track system. they have that ability does i
want to go to a private school, want to go to a different route. that's significant. but that's just one of the kind of opportunities for people who are prospering as families have. so thank you first of all too windy and scott for the development of the index and it think it is going to be a game changer in the way we are able to talk to legislators about the nexus of the economy and the family. [applause] >> the word economy comes from a greek word that starts with household. for a long time we just kept we use the word economy in her own as though it is purely financial but household and finances, those two things go together. tell us about how they come together and give us some background on the index and the initiative. >> thank you, stan. i'm an economist. i'm also someone who has suffered the term associate with
divorce, and that, nation of experience on being an economist on the economic side and having been a child of divorce is what drove my husband and i and it's my personal story to the index. i'm that little girl who was sitting before the court appointed judge because my mom -- >> you can find all of c-span's coverage from cpac online. we leave is to take you live in the georgian universe discussion about prison sentencing laws. >> the peace they called their summit. my name is rabbi lipskar. along with the many partners to collaborate and work with us, are producing this event today. we are privileged and honored you have joined us here as we take some time over the next few days to talk about and share our experiences and ideas regarding
alternative sentencing and explore the possible role that alternative sentences can play both in reducing our number of individuals that are incarcerated, but certainly delivering on public safety and fiscal efficiency and responsibility. we have as you can see from the program, two very full days. we are very thankful that we have very excellent key experts and leaders in the fields of alternatives and the matters relating to that and, therefore, i just want to run through a few quick housekeeping matters so we can get them out of the way and we can get on with this important program. during the program and during the panels we are going to allow as much as possible for q&a, but because time is of the essence
and as you can see we're starting a few minutes late what we're going to try to do is utilize e-mail and twitter as you can see on the screen your e-mail address and the twitter if you like to submit some of your questions and comments that way, we'll have an opportunity to address them as well. also we're going to keep the introductions to our speakers, to our panels quite brief as you can see in the programs you have there is a wealth of information there which highlight all of the important features of each one of these individuals we're going to try and keep our focus on the substance of the program and not to the introductions. >> phone with somewhere going to be working with the coalition for public safety to produce a toolkit after the event as it's going to be for a specific and general questions and comments, and a key tool helping to prioritize the opportunities, the issues we discuss.
and once again you can submit some of those comments and thoughts on twitter and e-mail. and, finally, we have a special nice late edition. the national association for sentencing advocates and medications specialist along with the center for american progress are going to be hosting a cocktail event following today's program. we will make sure to announce the details of that towards the end of the day and we hope that everybody will join us there. one last thing. due to the late start we are going to run through the program this morning and not take the brakes as indicated in the schedule, but throughout the day after the morning, refreshments and coffee available in the atrium. so if you would like to take your own break that will be available to you. once again thank you all for joining us. without further ado i would like
to introduce rabbi lipskar, that chairman and founder of the alice institute come over 35 years ago, together and in the chambers -- aleph institute -- judge weinstein of the eastern district, unfortunately jack could not join us today but, of course, he sends his greetings. so thank you. rabbi lipskar. [applause] >> thank you very much. good morning to everyone. it is really a very special opportunity to sit together and address what can be one of the most important concept in our society today. thinking about this conference and the extraordinary collaboration of i would say an
extreme variety of high level people covers the entire spectrum of the criminal justice environment, that we can, during the course of this conference, and then had a pivotal necessary opportunity to rethink and retool that failed process. thank you to our extraordinary cosponsors, presenters for this inclusive summit. the reason i say failed, it's a strong word, has nothing to do with philosophy or ideology but simply based on the studies and statistics. the exponential growth of our prison population, including those on parole or ovation, they'll, the numbers are
staggering the last number i saw, 2014. somewhere between six and 7 million american citizens. 24% of the world's prison population is right here in the most democratic free country in the world, 5% of the general population. 29% of women that are in prison anywhere in the world are right here in the united states, women. single mothers and other circumstances. the enormous cost, wasted lives, destroyed families have the most effective environment for the perpetual promulgation of criminal conduct. people come out of prison we already know with recidivism statistics we know, they come out a lot better educated about how to do better the next time because they had a lousy lawyer, a lousy judge or whatever the
case is. and then, of course, an area that has not been addressed at all, and that's preventative education, which is a critical factor. so what do we do about that? judge weinstein shared with me the american law institutes draft number three, 2014, for sentencing reform. some of you may be aware that. a very brave and bold and forward thinking perspective. their discussion at his paper well studied and well documented on collateral damage, to include in collateral damage deportati deportation, loss of profession, loss of public assistance
benefits, low self-esteem, et cetera. single most devastating collateral damage was not even mentioned, not received any attention. more than 3 million children under the age of 18 have a parent in prison. 3 million children under the age of 18. the damage to those children, it's vast, deep and very pervasive. because it comes at an age where the child is in his formative stage, the most critical time of the child's life. and poor self-esteem, underperformance in schools, drugs, the disproportionate, way disproportionate percentage of children entering the criminal justice system seven times as many children of prisoners go on
to the criminal justice system eventually, seven to one. and one of the children entering into the criminal justice system at any level will be arrested and 40 becomes an adult, one out of 10. these are children. you can say it's the person's fault, he should have known, but you don't say that a person who doesn't send his children to school. you do something about it, and here we are perpetuating this act. we are causing battle process. we are not even addressing it. that's the key. we need implement other means that will address all the concerns of 3551. very wisely but, unfortunately, while retribution, restitution, deterrence, public safety have continued to be the hallmark that is taken into consideration during sentencing, the one thing that has been excluded is
rehabilitation. they took that word out in the 1990s. the reason they took that word out is because they didn't have a budget for it. very simple. you don't have a budget, you can't do it. i think we not requirement for successful reentry, the supposedly absolute societal, impossible if you take a person out of a warehouse where he's been in suspended animation for so long, you here sincere stores and success stories i've seen and heard are much too few edges with inspired by religious or other group of volunteer or a mother who never loses her love for the child and suddenly some of the claims a coveted position in the inmates mind that his confidence. so many times it's the mother that really gets the person we thinking his life but it's not our system. there's a reason, and this is
not a theological discussion. there's a reason why the foundation books on ethics and the rally, the bible, it considers all different modalities of punishment. capital punishment, corporal punishment, financial punishment but not prison. prison is not considered a punishment that is accepted in difficult times, nor are after. the reason is without getting into the philosophy and psychology et cetera, et cetera, which is now a lot to address, present is living a suspended animation. you want to do something, you cayoucan't even though your teer to be because he said i will take you off my calling list, like i've seen happen. and impossible way to grow or thrive, and no sense of wonder
the single most important aspects in life which now has been proven through controlled studies and behavioral cardiology, behavior neurology. one of the most difficult one of the five most critical factors meaning and purpose, no meaning, no purpose, empty space. with all the really extraordinary minds ideas and selfless pursuit of human dignity, to develop something that's different, we should put our minds together and say it's time for change, real change. i don't mean to something else a little bit. this is going fast. the numbers are exponential, 10 to one numbers in terms of growth, 3 million kids could be a lot of problems in the next generation, and it's just a
growing. in our times of the god particle, neural plasticity, robotic mind control, when we have really grown and advance the exponentially in dealing with everything except one, the human condition, and as such we need to make some changes in the system and hopefully that this conference with all of you together think in a commonality because you all have, so to speak, already committed to the concept, we put together to make a little change that could be so important. it's a great honor for me to introduce a very special chairperson of this summit, a person who dedicated all of his life to rethinking and humanizing the sentencing process in a very significant
way, former deputy attorney general under the carter administration, a human being of the highest order on the federal bench as you know. he cared about every single person. he did what i consider to be the ultimate position of a jurist and really showed what the jurist truly is. i have to say that i bring regards to mr. attorney general, mr. deputy attorney general, from a different jack weinstein this is that i do respect the efforts of you to improve the criminal law. and he is one of the two icons that look at what i think about our alternative concepts, yourself and judge weinstein. there's no question in my mind that the one thing that impressed me the most i've ever seen, exactly what you do is when he senses his people.
he comes off the bench and sits down with the person who sends his until it's been in the eye and he knows he's talking to another human being, and to show that extraordinary compassion that it's a great honor to be under your chairmanship. [applause] >> spread my mother is not a -- i'm sorry my mother is not a lesser she could've heard that introduction. >> you've heard the statistic, 2.3 million persons in this country are behind bars. as our previous speaker said, we have 5% of the world's
population, and 25% of the prison population. in 1980 there were approximately 24,000 people in federal prison. in 2012 there were 217,000, an increase of almost 10%. in the federal prison system, over half are there for drug related crimes, although the statistics are not as high for state prisons, it still is the largest category of offenses. and there are very serious problems in the sentencing of juveniles and african-americans in this country. i think the shocking rate of recidivism is evidence that the system is not working. the statistics that we do have do not reflect the total number
of persons whose lives have been altered and shaped and misdirected because of incarceration of a family member. i think, however, today we are at the threshold of reform in the criminal justice system. i believe the timing of this summit is highly significant. today, there's a growing public perception of the need for reform. historically, politicians, acting in good faith, whether democrats or republicans, conservatives or liberals, share a common thought, the way to deal with crime is be tough, to be tough on crime. as a result it meant more people were incarcerated for ever increasing periods of time. however, as bob dylan said, the
times they are a changing. that are presently bilateral and bipartisan reform efforts to deal with the criminal justice system. the united states the federal sentencing commission has authorized early release for over 24,000 persons related for drug possession. an additional 40,000 are planned with some 14,000 to be released this year. the administration has addressed the need for reform. it's just not the federal system. in california we have a statewide initiative and proposition 47 in 2014, change shoplifting and drug possession from felonies to misdemeanors, making people eligible for earlier release. in texas in the year 2007 they
were estimates that they needed an additional 17,000 beds which required new prisons at a cost of $2 billion. instead, the legislature allocated a small amount and used community service and didn't need those extra beds. i think we need to capture the momentum for these changes. interestingly, there is reform elsewhere in the civil justice system. the alternative dispute resolution mechanisms are changing the way we look to litigation and dispute. elsewhere in the world, in england came out with a report access to justice which revolutionized the law in england, the source of our common law that some people said it's the biggest change in the history of english law. as we know we are having
distinguished cosponsors, distinguished panel speakers, panelists, but the ultimate success of this summit is going to depend upon you, our audience. you are the stakeholders in this criminal justice system. if we are successful you will be the spokesman for and actors who implement the changes we urge. i think we need to be open to alternatives such as community service, finds, suspended since, pretrial release, identification and screening, risk assessment, bonding schedules, court based clinicians, recover engagement charging. we also need to deal with the
problems of reentry which are series. what are the factors that make reentry and lack of recidivism possible? this is the era of big data. what are the facts that show? is there some correlation between the length of a sense than the fact that recidivism? is there some indication of participation in programs in prison that indicate somebody is less likely or more likely to engage recidivism? we should not use our jails and prisons for the place for drug treatment. and you to find out what facts are a result of having failed to have those programs. the criminal justice system is not standing. the criminal justice system is dynamic, and we learn more about the consequences of our actions and we're able to adapt and
adopt new methods to deal with the problem. this summit should be a learning process for all of us. we need to cover and share information about proven methods as well as explore new methods. we need to do financially what we have to do. humanely, humanly constructed and consider public safety and victims of crime. what to expect, the first they were going to lead us to look at the leading work in going the ohio department of rehab and creation followed by federal express. day to we will examine at some length the alternatives as well as exploration of successful reentry programs and the current federal legislation. we have an interactive program,
partners with -- let me tell you what i did. as a young federal judge was confirmed by the senate in 1971. i had no idea what the sentence to impose two years, three years, four years, probation, what to do. i had no data, no information. there was a school, federal judicial school, but there was a great deal of emphasis on that. i had a four step program. the first think of every criminal since i imposed on a we examined on a notion that i made for reconsideration to see whether in hindsight that appeared appropriate and needed to be changed. and occasionally i did. the second thing i did, i visited prison. while they had to our tours or with the launch a three hour tours. i would spend at least two days. i would sit in a classification,
disciplinary hearing, substance abuse programs, ethnic groups, educational programs, vocational training and got a sense of what different prisons were like, programs they had available. and a third thing that i did is the i called up the caseworker of the institution to find out how the president was doing. and, of course, they didn't accept my call because they thought i was a fraud, but then they called me and found out. and asked are they participating in the substance abuse? are they doing things? and i would find that kind of attitude was increased because of my interest in them, they made an effort. and, of course, they were all hoping to get a modified since and i modified some, very few. but the possibility existed and that made a difference. and the last thing that i did was i have the probation department did meet quarterly reports, written reports about whatever was made for education, substance abuse, jobs.
and then called in the individual defendant and the probation officer after hearings to meet with me in chambers and discuss what has been done and what should be done in the future. as a result one of the saddest but at the same time flattering things, i got several letters from people i sent to prison who asked if they could use me as a reference but because they thought i knew more about him than anybody else they had met. and that was good news but it was sad, unbelievably sad. we've got two full days. you know, we've got exceptional panels here. our first panel, the future of the trust and what an organization it is has been working with a number of state governments and tracking their efforts of success with a criminal justice reform. particularly in the fields of justice reinvestment. jake horowitz from pew, one of the main architects and chair of
the georgia criminal justice, reform commission, judge michael boggs of the georgia court of appeals, juliene james from the united states department of justice bureau, justice assistance, and senator gerald malloy of the south carolina state senate, and judy owens, the southern poverty center. they will talk about how states can protect public safety while reducing levels of imprisonment. leaders of reform efforts of georgia mississippi and south carolina will discuss other states move from problem solving statements to policy reform to results. the stores from these three states will be placed in a national context reform as part of this summit meeting. and like to bring the first panel up. [applause]
>> good morning. the introductory remarks this morning talked about levels of incarceration that are historically or national unprecedented in the united states. those figures were in 100 adults down bars, some sort of correctional control when adding probation or parole. at a high water mark in 2007. since that period in 2007, incarceration rates have fallen 10% of -- 13%. meanwhile, both violent and property crime has fallen by more than 20%. so there's a bunch of reasons for this that i think the introductory remarks talked about a few bigger what we will
try to do on this panel is take a look at how three states made conscious decisions to revisit their sentencing corrections portfolios in order to achieve a better public safety return on state spending. we will talk about justice for investment initiative which the public-private partnership which is the work of these states, bring into consideration efforts to stop and reverse the growth of correctional obligations, build a continuing of evidence a continuing of evidence-based and committee based supervision services and sanctions and finally hold both defenders and the system more accountable to so that's our modest charge the next 55 minutes or so. my name is jake horowitz come on the policy director for the public safety performance project at the pew terrible tough. we have for folks who cannot be beat in terms of bringing you information on this topic that i just laid out. i will make their brief introduction to governor want to skip those and get right to the meat of this.
sitting to my right is a judge boggs because it's on georgia's court of appeals, former so pure your court justice. for the purposes of today's remarks easily speaking in large part as an individual who served on the special counsel for google justice reform for georgians starting at 211 to group he co-chaired since 2012. sitting next to them, juliene james and senior, juliene james comes to policy, juliene james and senior policy adviser at the bureau of justice assistance at the u.s. department of justice. both administered the justice for investment initiative that also service technical assistance provider tuesday after department of justice. to my left, jody owens, managing attorney of the southern poverty law center vicki served on mississippi's corrections and criminal justice task force in 2013. to his left, senator gerald malloy has represents out your last would have district since 2002, served on south carolina's
criminal justice whom task force announces at the chairman of its oversight committee. they are are the introductions. these folks let the reform efforts in the respective states and ms. james overseas the initiative. so why did your states care about this course what was the reason for reform? why was it a problem to begin with at your states decide you want to spend some time focusing on the? judge boggs, take us back spent the problems they been in georgia is the a lot of data today and georgia was led predominantly by technical assistance provided by. but we explored our data. our data suggested a couple of things are georgia's prison population doubled, subset in 2011 when we began this initiative, one in so many georgians was imprisoned. national average was one in 100. that may georgia the fourth largest incarceration state in the united states.
to make matters worse one in 13 georgians can one in 13 george it was under some form of congressional control either in prison, on probation or parole. 130 which made georgia the national leader in community supervision or corrections that we were spending roughly $1.1 billion a year on the department of corrections budget and the return on investment georgia's taxpayers were receiving about a 33% recidivism rate which met as we released about 18,000 inmates a year, 6000 would be back within three years. the budget in the state doubled from 1990-2011 for corrections from about $492 million, the $1.1 billion. so that was a very clear fiscal imperative but also there was this moral imperative to you alluded to it but the question was what was driving this enormous growth and a star with tough on crime policies that policymakers had passed including mandatory minimums, abolishing earn time credit,
those sorts of things which got i think many folks elected but ultimately created some disparities. ultimately, people came to the table in georgia over the fiscal imperative but also because moral imperative. we were locking up about 60% of our standing prison population for nonviolent drug offenders. we know about 20% of the offenders in 2011 were not only nonviolent but 20% were categorized as low risk. we were locking up a lot of people in the state of georgia who based on data that has since come to light could more o up oy be triggered an evidence-based programs. those were the statistics that drove us to the conversation. >> senator malloy, he wrote about cost competitive, high level, nonviolent. what was different? >> thank you for having as thank you for having this year and good to be on the panel with these great panelists. my judgment was at georgia tech football player, not a georgia football player.
not in the sec conference. last night spent y'all got football and south carolina? [laughter] >> but thank you for being here, and for those that we're not have the opportunity i want to thank you all for your support during the last year. we've had a difficult time and south carolina. lost one of my good friends was a center in south carolina through a valley act, senator ping me, he was my suitemate, principal telecom worked really hard on certain issues but what of things he always said, incarceration rate, up particularly minorities and the poor was just reprehensible and immoral. we had started our project back in 2006. just take you back to a practical way to look at it took legislators don't look at a system. stockeu line at absolutely no system. so we would come in and we
wanted to be, portray ourselves as a lockup society. it didn't have write permissions a bit of legislation that would come in and they would get it passed in say the mandatory minimum was three years, and so once we started looking at it, here's the numbers. i have my ribs i can make certain we get it right. in the 25 years prior to 2010 when we started, our prison population was about 9000. it increased to 25,000. so what we know is that in the early '80s, what did we have? the war on drugs. what we now know is the war on drugs did not work. and then we had enhancements and those as relates to guns and other things. so we have a relatively poor state. we have 4.6 million people in the state, and you can look at the numbers in her portion after
the rate of incarceration. i don't quote georgians very often but speaker newt gingrich said that you were supposed to lock up that people. southcom i was just locking up people they were mad at. what we had was we were spending on prison population increased 63 million. we knew we are going to go out. we saw that we had a prison operational increasing from 141, to 370. which is he is with all of these numbernumbers that we get into g in place. here's the big numbers are 49% of our prison population was nonviolent. 44% of those that were incarcerated were in for class f. which was the lowest class of felonies. when we start looking at these triggers to see what was bring about our prison population, and so we had this thing that were revocations that were a real problem. we put in this matter, have the
-- you go into the court and they go before a judge and said you don't have a job. you are supposed to have a job. so they revoke you. you don't have the right address, you didn't have your address down. they would revoke you. you failed a drug test, they revoke you. it was a large percentage of those that were going back into the prison system. and so at the time we knew that we had to do something and we had to decide whether we're going to be more rehabilitative and repentance society that just lock them up society. >> we will head into the process but let me cut you off there and bring in mississippi. we've heard nonviolent offenders, lots of revocation, big bills that any other and what else was a motivating factor in mississippi? >> i wish i could say it was the moral conscious of the state but it was more so costs.
examination was we would spend projected $260 million given the rise of incarceration over the next five to seven years. mississippi already being a particularly poor state realized we couldn't afford to do so. we were second in the nation with the highest per capital incarceration only to louisiana. at that point it was bankrupting the state. our office at the southern poverty law center we are suing the state, suing the department of corrections for violations of eighth amendment to make it really expensive if we want to drive the cost of because we knew the state couldn't pay, but that was enough. lawsuits took way too much time. five or six years to come we're still litigating the same class action to file before those bringing pew into the picture, and suddenly we have dropped five spots but we are number 45th in the nation because the policy changes that we made from realizing two-thirds of our people were going back.
they were going back to jail, not because they committed the crimes but because they violated the supervision efforts. two-thirds were doing nonviolent crimes but it just didn't make sense. there were too many things we could do for offenders as opposed to incarcerate them. >> the last question. we were a lot about the bill coming due, the projected growth in population the prison population has plateaued at is now starting to fall mostly in more than half the states. back in 2010 it was growth. that with the problem to what is it now and how do states respond to the changing landscape? >> i think we've got an interesting split because there are places that are still overcrowded and that's dangerous and that's costly. that's not going to be an issue for the states to have the motivation to come to the table. but we are seeing this new set of states that really interested still because either they are no
longer interested in making those investments. their facilities are aging and they're really facing a choice. do they build a new or do they make a smaller but more potentially effective investment and alternative? i think it's the changing landscape the one that we are constantly learning and going to the data to help us understand what's next. >> that's why states want to get involved in this, want to take a fresh look at the system. now i want to turn back to senator moore and ask about the process. is a divisive issue? as you mentioned the bills are all moving in the wrong direction on this issue. how did you bring a focus that on this process to which each from problem statement of policy solutions speakers that's a great pleasure it happened was we first had to get a commitment to doing it. then we had to get the expertise and that's when. and others came in to end up helping. basically to take the politics
out we went toward evidence-based practice. so to find the things that would end up working, finding those things that were a problem in our system. and so whenever the things did not make sense, one of the big ones was the third highest unkosher defenses have delighted with driving under suspension non-dui related. so when you start having those kind of things occupying prison space, that brings attention to. then you bring in the groups, bipartisan, bring in all of the stakeholders from prosecutors, defenders, faith-based groups and experts is what. ended up doing, bringing the evidence together, and then you start putting together something that would create a system. and then assistance from our judiciary, from our executive governor and from the legislative branch, and try to bring everybody together, put it together with the task force.
>> mr. owens, senator malloy has talked about bipartisan interbranch bicameral data-driven, bring all the people around the table and talk about this. in your experience has actually expanded the wind of what was kabul? data change any opinions? did you think the process for people speak with i think people learned to understand what the system really looked like. our judge spoke to going to prisons. we had so many policymakers that didn't understand why people were going back to prison. when p. was able to work with the department of corrections and so if you want to reduce the population get to do this. if you look at the data and accept that you're doing something wrong, we have prosecutors want one thing, defenders when something of the we wanted judges wanted more autonomy. everybody wanted something at our process was the most effective because we have subgroups. we had one person, like-minded person working on each subgroup. every year we go back, i'm suree
it's the same stuff to sure it's the sims have to let and george people are still trying to roll back some of the things we did because of the tough on crime thing. it sounds sexy during campaign ads and people and so let's lock them up but they would take the worst example, one person doing something a bit and make them the poster child. that's a we are up against still in our states to continue to show these games make sense because we get these games every year and they continue to calculate. we still don't know what they would end up looking like. >> one thing that hasn't come up so far is straight leadership. one person grabbing this issue and saying this is what i'm going to focus on. could you talk a little bit about the governor in georgia? >> he was elected in 2010. is a former juvenile judge, former of the united states congress pick a side is a severe court judge from a position i used to hold. his son runs an adult felony drug court program. judge deal gets it. he understands not only just the
moral imperative but likewise the fiscal imperative the. at least you forget was going on in the country in late 2000 with respect to the budget issue relevant in all the states. i'd i said repeatedly i will continue to repeat states that are interested in doing this to have exceptional executive leadership. you cannot do this without that sort of executive leadership from the hard. our governor has led on this issue. i don't think because of the fiscal imperative but i think that might have been part of it but i think he has led iheart. is compassion from his interest in trying to think outside the box. for georgia, collaborative, inclusive process like south carolina. jody's point i think is extraordinary well taken, that is what you can do in the version of criminal justice reform is much more limited than what i think you can do in the figure which is where you are not because it's an education process, letting folks know you
won't get beat by being soft on crime but also in forming. the data has been all along but if the moral imperative and the data were going to drive change and they would've already happened in mississippi and south carolina and georgia. but what essential component i think in lisp into george's success has been overwhelmingly executive leadership by governor deal. it is surprising to most of the most interestiinteresti ng to find out when we passed, just reform and a bipartisan legislature, democrats and republicans and independents, it passed unanimously. i think in the five years now, four years of torture the council, we've had maybe three no votes and every we passed this thing. the bill this year just passed out of the senate last week unanimously. i credit ex ord and leadership in the legislature and the senate and the house. but largely that is possible
because of the governor's leadership. would not have been possible without them. >> i love that george's model has been a big one that we should all look at. both because of the leadership and also that first for the system understanding that was the ups and of this assistance was made available. so it's not just about keeping the stakeholder from rolling back the average which i think is so key, but the system that is is a product of years and years and layers and layers of decisions. specific strategic policy decisions have been made over the years and it's not going to be undone by one legislative session. georgia has taken the view that we are going to take this one at a time, one step at a time was a huge accomplishment, but then they took great entry and juvenile justice and now are looking to take another step.
i know that you're interested in looking at the probation population. there are long probation sentences, fines and fees, something that is on the radar. really i think they would not have been where they are if they had not taken that first step. i think looking at this as it's not just a want and then you can't fault it is the one you. that's something we're really trying to support at the department. >> actually the executive leadership is critical because it's something with all due respect we did not have in south carolina. i was in georgia. the judges are member back in 2011 after soft on had passed it, and we did our first round and we've not done the reinvestment peace and the juvenile justice reform, something that is needed. we did go through the body with only three no votes from both bodies back in 2010. the question becomes now, where do we go from here to try to end
up taking it further. george with all due respect, what happens is you have to have the reinvestment aspect of it which is something i know that we will probably end up getting chance to discussing spam we get the why and the how. time check is simply because with three other topics here which is what. what are the policies we did, what are the politics and was the impact? if someone could give me a time check. all right. policies, but you get to number one posted understate from a state that your particularly proud of them what were the best things you saw come out of this process speak was that g3 provision that allowed any event from nonviolent crimes after serving 25 percentage of his or sends to be eligible for parole. it's a provision that continues retroactively to make individuals decrease the time almost by 50, 75%. because of that provision we start a three strikes project in
which were helping individuals get out. we talk about people with 60 and 70 years of serve are now getting their lives back. really impactful for us. >> the equalization of drugs schedule one treated the same was a big deal, to get the prosecutors some flexibility of the most serious expand victims rights that were bringing more folks into the fold, expand the amount for property crimes and give folks a second chance on conditional discharges and bring and administered surcharges on matters of drug crimes. and to really take a look at all the mandatory minimums, end up getting the mandatory minimums out of the system. we increased some of the length of systems but to cut mandatory minimums and gave judges flexibility. what we are doing is taking the nonviolence out of the prison system and having more space for those that were committing violent crimes. >> hard to pick one in five
years of effort we have made, but just i think intuitively what you don't understand if you have been engaged in this is about first baby step, the first of in the criminal justice reform, the educational component, the data-driven component, the collaborative delivered process that we've included in georgia. it lead you to other areas that were more intuitive that you just made had not thought about. so georgia started with adult reform from wicked juvenile justice reform out of recognition of school to present my point issues that we are very aware of. then we moved into repented but we talked about stopping 8% population growth flat-lining from saving $264 million it into the juvenile of in what i called fossett then some at the top of the criminal justice system. we moved into reentry, deal with reintegrating these fixes back into the commute. of the one thing we did the first year in 1176 as a former drug court judge, i'm very proud
of cabinet putting $10 million through the legislative process in the expansion of accountability courts. we have felony adult veterans course, drug courts, mental health courts. i think those are demonstrative of a recognition in this nation that a large percentage of our prison population is there because an addiction issue of mental health issue, 80% is related. expansion of the capitol records addressing issue that's driving the criminal conduct is important. >> in south dakota, probation policy that is poorly understood and so what we're hoping to release the publication soon about the effects of that. essentially taking a whole class come a couple classes of low-level felonies and making a sense presumptively -- an alternative. then another come in delaware which is a unified system a little bit different but there are a handful of them in this
nation looking at pre-trials, where previously magistrates could use spidey sense to to release or not i want financial conditions to put on their pretrial release now. there is an objective assessment whether they pose a risk or not. >> dependence the balls reforms to the for investment you just heard, all the bills these days 70, 80, sometimes exceeding one and page in length. i have 20-40 plus provisions. if you're interested in a corner and these folks come also if you google pew and the states in of your other form it will come up with a brief the details the policies. so we are probably down to 10 minutes. we would you politics in impact. politics, some of the questions i would put out, who is most and least enthusiastic and why? going back to the question i
asked mr. owens order, to the process of opening windows, but anyone come across an issue or a support you didn't think they would support when you started the process? in this left-right coalition, is it for real? is a for real in your states? so pick on anyone of those enrolled from it. >> i am jumping. it's surprising we didn't appreciate why prosecutors and district attorney's and mississippi were opposed to legislation. we learned through the process that people being cars rated -- and cars with his a money business. the institution has to be paid. we had a big defense, a check-cashing offense. every kid in the world needs to learn how to balance a checkbook. that's not a recent they should be arrested but we realize district attorney's were supplementing the budget based on these charges. they continued to push back and we finally got to the bottom of it and we had to shame them about that, that they should fund their office off
overincarceration. that's one of the things that surprised us, why do so so opposed to this legislation. >> on south carolina, what was the linchpin moment? >> i think that basically let me paint the quick picture. 28 republicans in the senate, 18 democrats would ever, about 75 5 republicans in the house, 40 some odd democrats. so basically we are a very red state and so we are very prosecution oriented state. left last hundred and .
credit for it. [laughter] that's how it came up. issues of public policy are vetted with everyone having, all stakeholders having a say. that is the oddity here, that that's how this works. that's how all public policy works. generally, it's been my experience that most public policy is reactionary. and that's not always the best way to bring about the most solid foundation. >> when the citizens came in and the faith community came in, made a big difference as opposed to those of us who were sitting in the chairs every day. >> if we can put the slide up, these look at impact. i know these screens are small, but i'd be glad to share this with folks afterwards. this is all for naught if we
don't move the needle from the beginning. we talked about technical revocation, so the question is, where's the population today? there's a few other pieces i'd like folks to talk about. i'm going to go to sarah malloy to talk about facility closure, i'd like the judge to talk about race. but starting here with mr. owens, what have you seen in terms of impact in mississippi's prison poplation? >> we now -- population? >> we now can close a prison which is huge for us because when we started this fight about five years ago, we sued the geo corporation, and we were able to move them out of mississippi. but most states the contract with private prisons -- which we think is too ills, right? you're making money for incarcerating people which is something the state can do as well. but we hope in the next two years we'll be able to get all private prisons out of mississippi and to ease the whole system more accountable and make it less profitable. this has been absolutely transformative for our state. pause if you build it -- because
if you build it, you have to keep them full. most prisons have to insure that 90% of the prison has to be full at all times. and if you run a prison, you can tack time onto people's sentences if something happens. so this has been a larger -- [inaudible] than we ever would have imagined possible. >> and mississippi fell from the highest prison rate to fifth in one year. senator malloy, talk about closures. >> well, i'll tell you and, again, i've been fortunate to chair the senate's commission, and we have an oversight commit that we've been able to chair. and we've had the opportunity to close three and a half prisons in south carolina. and so that's real money as it relates to our fiscal conservatives. now, looking at the chart, you end up seeing the population has gone down to 21,000 and change. i think that one of the folks said something during one of our committee meetings.
they said in order to make things change, you have to make them change. if you want to move the mouse, you've got to move the cheese. and so you can't do -- [laughter] the same thing over and over. you've got to end up making it work. and so i think that very effectively the three and a half prison closures, the prison population has gone down. watching recidivism change and seeing crime rates continue to go down because none of it works if you don't cope your community -- keep your community safe. and the fact that crime rates are going down is very much a key component. >> judge, if you could hit on population, other impacts and particularly the issue of race and -- [inaudible] >> georgia was projected in 2011 our population in our prisons was expected to grow by 8%. it would have cost georgians about $260 million, and it would have given 60,000 inmates which would probably have made us the largest prison population per capita in the united states. that said, this chart
demonstrates from that baseline in 2011 we reduced our population by 9.5%. our number's around 52, but this shows 53. most importantly, i want everyone to understand, and i think the senator would agree with me on this as well, criminal justice reform is not responsible for all of this, right? i mean, it's hard to -- i want to make sure everyone understands that you can't necessarily attribute -- there's cycles of criminal conduct, there's different policing. this stuff works not in a vacuum. and so that said, our racial makeup of georgia's prison population, though i think there's been some significant effects in the following ways: from 2009 to 2015 criminal justice reform came in in '11. we've reduced the number of african-americans in georgia's prison system from about 66% to about 62%. still an unacceptable number, but the number's going in the right direction. it bodes well for the future, though, when you look at the
commitments of african-americans to georgia's prison system in 2015. in 2015 georgia admitted 9,983 african-american men and women to georgia's prison system. that was a 21% reduction in the number of african-american men, it was a 37.6% reduction in the number of african-american women. and that number of commitments in 2015, 9,983, represented the fewest number of african-americans committed to prison in georgia since 1988. since 1988. [applause] so i think, i think the numbers speak well that criminal justice reform in collaboration with other things have helped move the cheese. [laughter] >> we like that. and i want to puck up on that too. -- pick up on that too, you know, sort of untangling the various causes of the trends that we're seeing, because that's something we want to learn from. we want to learn from all the states' work.
and it's true that i don't think we can say with any confidence that these five things together made these changes x. so we have an assessment strategy that we've worked with our partners on that really looks at the specific policies. so in south carolina, revocations. we look at that. we look at what the officers are doing on the ground. we work with our states to come up with those really specific performance measures so that we don't wait three, five years down the line to say how are we doing. we know going into it whether judges are using the sentences available to them, whether the revocations are up or down and whether the alternatives are being used as intended. so that is something that we are constantly learning from and glad to say that we're working on an assessment for one of georgia's, a couple of georgia's policies that will be useful not just to them, i think, but also to many other states as they
look to make these kinds of changes in the future. >> how are we on time? is it zip it time or got a couple -- >> do you want to do questions? >> [inaudible] >> i just wanted to add something. sharing information between the states has been critical, and that's something that pew has really promoted. i mean, we are talking to other states as to what they are doing and end up coming up with these ideas. and i'm telling you, it's a critical part of this because those are things that we can do. >> so let's open it to a couple questions. we've got microphones in both aisles if you want to line up, and we'll take a couple questions. i just want to -- as folks line up and prepare for questions -- just sort of summarize a little bit here. so we talked about pressures for reform; bills coming due, population growth, a system that looked out of balance in terms of the types of admissions, both admission type and crime type, we saw length of stay increasing pretty dramatically. i know we created a process that
you guys talked about, bipartisan, inner-branch, consensus-based. we talked about policy reforms that hit different parts of the system. people use the analogy of a balloon, you squeeze in one place, it enlarges somewhere else. is so what folks in these states did was hit sentencing, hit behind the bars programming, hit parole release, earn time decisions, revocation policies on probation and parole, real diversity, really hitting the continuum of the criminal justice system and then addressed the politic, right? so recognizing the landscape of politics in your respective states, recognizing who needed to lead, making sure there were leaders in place. and then, and we didn't spend must have time on it, maybe we'll come back to it, but oversight issues. when the ink dries on these bills, the work is, what, half done? a third done? >> just standarding. >> and that's not to undercut the amount of effort it took to get those bills passed.
so a lot to cover. and so, let's see. we have one question. if you'd introduce yourself very briefly. >> hi, i'm carrie -- [inaudible] and i'm concerned that you've defined criminals by color rather than culture. we started moving a bill through congress three years ago, and my vignette was very simple. think eric garner, i can't breathe, and think wolf of wall street, madoff. and explain that the cops knew where eric was from the first arrestmented he went to jail -- arrest. he went to jail, was branded a felon. they knew where to find him. wolf got discovered when he did something stupid, madoff got found when he turned himself in. so behind that are the sros that bury crimes that should be in jail. finra publishes monthly reports with countless people over the years, thousands. and these are people that have stolen money, identity. we don't need the list.
we know what madoff is all about. and i actually p found the papers that showed that madoff's crimes were known 50 years ago. i put them up on my welcome back site. so for 50 years crimes were hidden when that's the culture that should be addressed as a criminal. rather than picking out a culture of young men and women that are really looking for guidance. so i'd like you to all pitch in somehow on that. >> the question may be about white collar versus street crime. there could be a question there about should we be saying more of these, less of these two prison. >> there's no doubt this criminal justice system has unfairly targeted social to yo economic -- socioeconomic issues. it's easy to be, as they say, guilty and wealthy versus innocent and poor. we know that. the system that goes back to the things that we've discussed in all our states from public defenders to prosecutors' offices, it's easy to prosecute someone welcome back who doesn't
look like you -- someone who doesn't look like you. >> there's a shift of -- >> sorry, ma'am. we're going to take a couple other questions here. sir? >> point's well taken. >> my name's art beeler, i'm from north carolina. on the sentencing commission in north carolina, professor, former bureau of prisons for 35 years. and hi, judy, i haven't seen you in a long time. [laughter] just one question i'm most interested in from my work with juveniles, because i work with juveniles pro bono. i spent all my life working in prison, and now i spend it working with juveniles. where is the prevention part of this piece? because if we can't get these middle schoolers who are now ramping up to become krill yo generallic, if we can't find them and stop them when they're in middle school, all this is for naught. and that's where we need to be going.
maybe even elementary school, but definitely middle school. so where is this going with those folks? >> judge position, but if -- boggs, but if anyone else wants to chime in. >> so we've looked at diversion youth in out of home places. and so we came up with a fiscal incentive grant program x we asked 29 counties in georgia who represented 70% of georgia's at risk youth to divert, to build evidence-based programs. we gave them money to build the programs that have been proven to reduce recidivism in that population, and we asked them to reduce their out of home placements by 50%. i'm pleased to report that they didn't reduce by 15%, they reduced by 62%. 1666 youth which would have been in out of home placements. the most important thing and the
point i think you're making, my wife is an elementary schoolteacher. i think when we have conversations about criminal justice reform, we think about the system; judges, prosecutors, defense attorneys, prisons, razor wire. that's what we're thinking about, community supervision, guns and badges. less intuitively but more importantly is the criminal justice reform is not just about the system. it's about getting further back in the continuum and working on education. i'll give you one statistic. i presided over felony criminal court for seven years, and in the first three years i counted 6,000 criminal defendants that i dealt with, and i asked them how far did you go in school, what drug did you first start using, and what was it? the first drug was marijuana, the age was probably around 13. what percentage of 6,000 adults that i dealt with had a high school diploma or a ged, would you guess? and i suspect these numbers are going to be relevant in your state as well. what percentage, think high school graduation rates.
20%, he says. here's the number, the number's 34. people, people. if that's not demonstrative of the correlative effect between criminal justice policies and education, i don't know what else is. right? so we've got to keep kids in school and think outside the criminal justice system when with we're fixing criminal justice policies. >> and the earlier education of children. one of the things that we have in our state, someone passed a read to succeed bill this past year but also core responding with that -- corresponding with that was trying to get to a universal full k education and earlier. that's one with of the key components. we have not addressed juvenile justice reform yet. we're doing it in piecemeal. we've got some pieces that are being found now like raise the age. south carolina's one of the only states that does not have it past 16. i think new york and north carolina has it down at 15. and so we need to end up changing that. and at the end of the day, treat children like children.
>> the nerve is really changing. i think often times with juveniles it's easier to control that message, but with the milligram and roper decisions -- [inaudible] i think people are really starting to pay attention to where kids are. and i think we've seen a decrease across the country on that same -- >> and pushing a little further on that, too, not just kids, but young people. 24, 25 too. i mean, we're really taking a lesson from that brain science that roper was based on to say, like, what else can we do? and we, can we learn from this and then let kids and young people leave that behind, seal, expunge? really looking at that as an option. >> and the sensetivities of people matter. we don't have a law in south carolina that raises the age, but my department of corrections' director, brian sterling, we have 17-year-olds that are incarcerated with the adults. he's got them all in one
institution where they eat together and do all that kind of stuff, you know? that's just something that he can do within his position. he's not required to do it by law, but he does. and so we can do the things that we can do to end up making it better as well. >> i want to say two quick things about the juvenile decision and then wrap up, because we just got the one minute sign. the first is if you go back to 2007, the texas reforms were mentioned in the introductory remarks. when representative jerry madden led that effort that asvelterred -- averted 17,000 beds, that same session of the legislature they also put $4.7 million into family partnerships. you know, proven model to reduce crime, teenage pregnancies, smoking, a bunch of other things that are sort of in between that very young age and sort of that age crime curve when folks in late adolescence are most likely to be in the system.
the other thing, and this is obviously a program that is really worth noting here. fascinating distinction between the adult and juvenile systemmings. if you look back, the peak of crime was in the early '90s in this country, and it's fallen ever since for everybody, kids and adults. the adult prison system has basically plateaued in about '07 or '09 depending on what numbers you're looking at. the juvenile commitment rate has been cut in half. so why is it that the adult system, experiencing the same crime decline as the juvenile system, has plateaued while the juvenile system has seen a peace dividend? part of the reason has to be length of stay. juveniles are only juveniles for so long. there's no such thing as a 35-year sentence for most jules. in the adult system, you have these longer average lengths of stay. the system is stacked up on it, it can only go so far. all right, i want to quickly wrap up by saying thank you to the paneltists.
what you heard here is that these are issues that are driven by policy decisions and so, therefore, policymakers need to lead and respond to them. i think you saw that leadership on stage today, so please join me in thank our panelists. [applause] >> well, thank you to our moderator, jake horowitz. i want to thank our panelists, judge boggs, ms. james, senator malloy and mr. owens, for your keen comments and that detailed view from some of the initiatives and successes and learning that is happening in some of the states. i'd now like to introduce to you mr. gary moore who is the director of the ohio department of rehabilitation and corrections. director moore has 40 years of
experience in, as a corrections professional, and he is very well known for his innovative and efficient prison management. but more importantly, i think, it's -- just want to note that director moore has a very important policy which is in order to truly affect and impact corrections in america, we must continue to invest in people, not in bricks and mortar. and he is committed to this process to not opening additional prisons in his state and under his care and really looking at some of the alarming incarceration rates of females and drug-related crimes that create collateral consequences that can last a lifetime. and he's going to underline the importance of making some of these changes and the prominence in today's society, so we look forward to your remarks. thank you. >> well, what a great panel that was. let me first -- i want to start
by saying it's a great day to be alive. and that's important to me because i think it reminds all of us that all of us can be a major part of making tomorrow a whole lot better for a lot of people if we believe it today. it is an honor to be here, and, you know, i started my career july 1,1974 as a teacher's aide. i was two pay raises below a corrections officer when i started, and i had some great experiences. and i thank god that i've been able to work in this profession. i had the opportunity at the age of 23 of desegregating a prison. cell houses, programs and jobs. had the best job in the world for about 12 years in different places being a warden or superintendent where you can really enact change if your vision is right. and most recently i've had the great opportunity to work with the american correctional association on restrictive housing or solitary confinement.
and what i want to just say with that is i see a tremendous parallel between the struggle with putting too many people in restrictive housing in our prison systems and the issue of mass incarceration that i want to spend most of my time doing today. but if you don't mind, i want to start with a personal story here because it's why i am here today. and it's very personal, but it's why i'm here. so i retired from our department of rehabilitation and correction at the end of 2002, and i loved our system, i loved our career, i loved everything i did. but i retired. and we did some work in the juvenile system. i had the opportunity to work for about three years working with juveniles running a facility and running the juvenile facilities in ohio. and then my wife and i became consultants, right? well, you don't supervise anybody when you're consulting. it's an interesting thing. and we were having a great time
and selfishly, very selfishly, linda and i had the chance -- i've been married 43 and a half years. i know that tops my correctional career. and i had the opportunity, linda and i, to spend a few days every month at our place at sunset beach, north carolina. i love that place. and we were having the greatest time, and we're doing consulting, we're writing, doing all kind of training and leadership development, and we're working with culture in prisons, something that we haven't heard thus far that is really important. and in december 2010 came. december 2010. and i got three calls from the transition committee in ohio. governor kasich had been elected, and the calls came in and said, gary, would you like to be the director of the department of rehabilitation and correction in ohio, a d. you spent your -- a department you spent your life reporting? i spent three or four minute, boy, what an honor it is, it was great, but no thank you. again, thank you so much, it's an honor.
the second call my response was a lot less, a lot shorter, and then the final call was, no, i really don't want to. and it was all selfish because we were enjoying our lives. finally, the fourth call comes in, and it says, listen, some people have been talking to governor kasich about how to run the correctional system. got a lot of budget with issues, we've got to deal with the budget, and he just wants to bounce some of these ideas off of you, would you at least come in and talk to him? now, i would hope regardless of your political persuasion or whatever, when a governor calls and asks for your opinion, you would give it. folks, this was december 27, 2010. what, seven weeks after the election? the largest state agency trying to figure out what we're going to do here. so, but the person said you've only got 15 minutes with the governor. fifteen minutes. my wife's all in. we live about an hour from columbus. she says, we'll go, we'll spend the time, 15 minutes, then we'll go to lunch. [laughter] now, i know my loyalties were with my wife.
so we do, we go there. we're at the 19th floor, i take linda down to one side where they have some refreshments, diet soda, so she's all settled. i go meet john kasich for the first time. never met john kasich. so i shake his hand. look just like he does on television, and he says, gary? i say, yes? he says, you've only got 15 minutes. i said, i understand that. he said i want to bounce some ideas that people have been giving me, and i want your honest reaction. i'm not going to give all the ideas that he had, but he spent about ten of those minutes talking about the plans. we've got to reduce the budget, and this is how we're going to do it. and at the end of that conversation he says, what do you think? i said, without thinking -- and i haven't had any notes up here, i'm not very scripted -- i said that is the stupidest idea i've ever heard. [laughter] we're not going to send people out of our state. we're not going to give people the care and the private
facility someplace else outside of ohio away from family, doing things that we don't know what's going on and turn them back to neighborhoods and families and expect those neighborhoods and families to be better than they were when they left. that 15 minutes, folks, went to three hours. some of you have heard this story. three hours. three hours with a governor. now, remember, i started at the marion correctional institute in 1974. finally, he says, is your wife here? and i said, yes. so they send someone down to get linda. she's still down in the soda room, right? [laughter] and so when she walks in, the eyes were big. i knew she'd had more than one large soda. [laughter] meets the governor and says, governor says, comes over, shakes linda's hand, says, linda, i want gary in this job. and we're going to do it his way with.
and at that moment i had no intention until that moment of taking that job. none. none. and, folks, the next thing he said is, gary, i want you to reform the most unreformed part of government. do it. and we've dedicated, since december 27, 2010, to this. i'm going to talk about some of these things after i talk about what i consider to be the insanity of what we have talked about thus far. so let me just talk, we talked about -- i've got to talk about this before we do, because it's important. you know, from 1920 to 1975 our country, the united states of america, had a very stable prison population. it was, you know, ran between about 200,000 and about 400,000,
maybe just under 500,000 for 55 years. i think it just adjusted with the population. but 1975 it was a dramatic increase that we saw. and, in fact -- and we've talked about numbers, but from 1975 we'd gone to under 500,000, about 400,000 people to about 2.5 million in our state prisons and jails. at the same time, i can tell you in ohio, in ohio we have the lowest violent crime rate we've had since 1969. and i'm going to talk a little bit about the trends in ohio before we get into this. and we know, you know, we know that martinson wrote books about nothing -- vietnam ended during that time period, and our people came back not supported, and a drug culture at this point and tough to get jobs. ..
never one outside mr. hears that understanding in what we are and what human being. we are working with human beings. and i will tell you there are people that do not believe that. and if you don't understand it, talk to someone trying to get a job who spent maybe six months in prison or in some cases have never been to prison. folks, we have to understand this and we have to talk about it. we have to talk about the fact we are in the people business, not the inmate is a spirit let me go to actress briefly. july 1st, 1974. i don't think i'm that old peers in the state of ohio, today we have 27 present. 8300 people in prison in ohio. today there's 50,600 people in prison in ohio clear eyed about subset, the day